Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Facetiousism

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete. Michig (talk) 08:19, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Facetiousism

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG. Neologism. Only references found are to things like Facebook and Urban Dictionary. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Jbh ^Talk 06:01, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 06:04, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 06:06, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable neologism that does not even rise to the level of a WP:DICDEF as no reliable dictionary defines it. Writing this article is, perhaps, an example of the non-notable term in use, and I suspect that someone is trying to pull our chain. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:14, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
~~Redirect to Deconstruction~~ Delete for failing WP:GNG, WP:NEOLOGISM, and WP:DICDEF. FourViolas (talk) 06:16, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above. Nothing of value. Josh Milburn (talk) 13:55, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, invented. Hairhorn (talk) 16:33, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.